Sanjeev Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3466 of 2026

Sanjeev Kumar

		.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Vishal	Agarwal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 67

¶6

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Vishal Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rakesh Kumr Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in anticipation of his arrest in Case Crime No. 576 of 2008, under Sections-420, 467, 468, 470, 471, 477A & 120-B IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Muzaffar Nagar.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per allegation of FIR, the applicant has electrified 200 tubewells on the basis of alleged forged letter issued on behalf of the Government, thereby causing loss to the Electricity Department. It is submitted that the applicant has not committed any forgery on the basis of letter of State Government as well as letter of Superintending Engineer electrifying 200 tubewells. It is further submitted that the co-accused Ved Prakash Agarwal, who is also Junior Engineer in the department, has also been granted anticipatory bail by the coordinate bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 3339 of 2026. Therefore, applicant is also entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that the FIR is of the year 2008. His name was surfaced during investigation without there being sufficient material against him. In case, he is released on anticipatory bail, he will cooperate during investigation. The charge sheet has not been filed till date.

¶10

NABAIL No. 3466 of 2026

¶11

2

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶13

Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations, gravity of offence and antecedents of applicants, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to get anticipatory bail till submission of charge sheet under Section 193 BNSS as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 .

¶14

In the event of arrest, the applicant, Sanjeev Kumar involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶20